Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

ESPN tries to cover for Referees

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:04 am
  • Why NFL officials are ejecting players who don't actually throw a punch


    Lane could be seen shoving his left arm into the chest of Packers receiver Davante Adams, after Adams had grabbed and twisted Lane's face mask, but that was the apparent extent of Lane's aggression.

    Not even Adams could remember an actual punch thrown, saying that all he could recall was "a lot of hand fighting going on."


    Let's be clear on how the NFL treats punching in its rulebook, the document that all players and coaches use to understand how to navigate the game.

    Rule 12, Section 4, Article 1(a) lists throwing a punch or a forearm as among the acts that can trigger the league's multiple-foul automatic-ejection rule. In other words, if a player is penalized twice in a game for throwing a punch or forearm, he is to be automatically ejected.

    Lane, Spain and Howard were all ejected after a single penalty, however. Why?

    The rules give the referee power to eject in circumstances that are deemed "flagrant." For these purposes, flagrant is defined as a violation of rules that is "extremely objectionable, conspicuous, unnecessary, avoidable or gratuitous."

    http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post ... ow-a-punch

    What a crock of shit.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy

    http://ivotuk.com/
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 15818
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:05 am
  • so.........what Adams did is just fine because he's a Packer. Basically
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6032
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:09 am
  • What Adams did was much more dangerous to a players health than what Lane did.
    "Our Quarterback is a Bad Man!" - Michael Robinson
    User avatar
    Foghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1307
    Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:43 am
    Location: The Desert


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:10 am
  • Truth, and it's extremely convenient that they magically didn't see it. Just like they didn't see Graham getting mugged in the end zone.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6032
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:10 am
  • You know if the roles were reversed, this game would've been the main headline for ESPN, NFL Network, and everyone would've been discussing the travesty that occurred.

    But since it went against Seattle, nobody cares. Typical
    semiahmoo wrote:I'll say it again - this is Pete's last season in Seattle if the teams doesn't make a legit hard run deep into the playoffs.
    User avatar
    Jerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1896
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:39 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:12 am
  • Jerhawk wrote:You know if the roles were reversed, this game would've been the main headline for ESPN, NFL Network, and everyone would've been discussing the travesty that occurred.

    But since it went against Seattle, nobody cares. Typical


    Truth

    Remember Fail Mary? Remember the non-call against Sherman covering Julio Jones on a prayer of a throw at the end of the game? Those were travesties!

    But this? No big deal. The Referees were just doing their job, covering Rodgers butt.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy

    http://ivotuk.com/
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 15818
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:16 am
  • ivotuk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:You know if the roles were reversed, this game would've been the main headline for ESPN, NFL Network, and everyone would've been discussing the travesty that occurred.

    But since it went against Seattle, nobody cares. Typical


    Truth

    Remember Fail Mary? Remember the non-call against Sherman covering Julio Jones on a prayer of a throw at the end of the game? Those were travesties!

    But this? No big deal. The Referees were just doing their job, covering Rodgers butt.


    Exactly. It's so hypocritical, but they know that the Packers have a bigger fanbase that we have, so they have to tone down the narrative. Preserve those ratings.

    But next time some controversial call goes our way, you can bet itll be the headline story.
    semiahmoo wrote:I'll say it again - this is Pete's last season in Seattle if the teams doesn't make a legit hard run deep into the playoffs.
    User avatar
    Jerhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1896
    Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 7:39 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:45 pm
  • Jerhawk wrote:You know if the roles were reversed, this game would've been the main headline for ESPN, NFL Network, and everyone would've been discussing the travesty that occurred.

    But since it went against Seattle, nobody cares. Typical



    Your right. Remember how for weeks, and I mean weeks last year everyone talked about how could Richard Sherman got away with holding on Julio Jones. It was incessant. Never stopped and that was the last play of the game. There were a pethora of calls and plays we had yesterday that influenced the out come of the game. It will always be the world against us. And forget it if you think the perfect, I never do anything wrong, Packers will get a call against them.
    Never happen.

    Best thing to do is tuck this one away and bring it out again in January when we face them again in the playoffs. Make no mistake about it. We're just getting started. This isn't over by any stretch.
    RW92
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 226
    Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:45 pm


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:22 pm
  • Jerhawk wrote:
    ivotuk wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:You know if the roles were reversed, this game would've been the main headline for ESPN, NFL Network, and everyone would've been discussing the travesty that occurred.

    But since it went against Seattle, nobody cares. Typical


    Truth

    Remember Fail Mary? Remember the non-call against Sherman covering Julio Jones on a prayer of a throw at the end of the game? Those were travesties!

    But this? No big deal. The Referees were just doing their job, covering Rodgers butt.


    Exactly. It's so hypocritical, but they know that the Packers have a bigger fanbase that we have, so they have to tone down the narrative. Preserve those ratings.

    But next time some controversial call goes our way, you can bet itll be the headline story.


    The day I lost respect for Rodgers was when I heard his fail mary reaction. Erin you want to call this a travesty?
    cymatica
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 813
    Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2014 7:40 am


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:47 pm
  • RW92 wrote:
    Jerhawk wrote:You know if the roles were reversed, this game would've been the main headline for ESPN, NFL Network, and everyone would've been discussing the travesty that occurred.

    But since it went against Seattle, nobody cares. Typical



    Your right. Remember how for weeks, and I mean weeks last year everyone talked about how could Richard Sherman got away with holding on Julio Jones. It was incessant. Never stopped and that was the last play of the game. There were a pethora of calls and plays we had yesterday that influenced the out come of the game. It will always be the world against us. And forget it if you think the perfect, I never do anything wrong, Packers will get a call against them.
    Never happen.

    Best thing to do is tuck this one away and bring it out again in January when we face them again in the playoffs. Make no mistake about it. We're just getting started. This isn't over by any stretch.




    Many fans on this board are covering for the referees and downplaying the atrocity that went down in Lambeau yesterday.

    Not sure why we would be surprised that ESPN is covering for the golden franchise.
    Hawkpower
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1936
    Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:53 am
    Location: Phoenix az


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:06 am
  • If it was the other way around, the sports world would be losing their minds.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6032
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:51 am
  • Lane was ejected for basically rolling on top of the guy who brought him to the ground with a facemask while Martellus Bennett got a 15 yard penalty for decking KJ late in the game.
    Go Hawks!
    oldhawkfan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1264
    Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 12:06 pm
    Location: Spokane


Re: ESPN tries to cover for Referees
Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:15 am
  • I saw Pete losing his mind after KJ got decked.

    The ref was trying to placate him by motioning that Lane had "punched" therefore the difference in penalty.

    What a joke.
    Hawkpower
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1936
    Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:53 am
    Location: Phoenix az




It is currently Sat Sep 23, 2017 5:06 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online